Would you trade Matt Flynn for Dwayne Bowe

I joked in an earlier thread about trading flynn for desean jackson -- which realistically they'd never go for despite their horrible qb situation (then again, they do make crappy decisions at coordinator) -- but it got me thinking about another team with quarterback whoes, a knee jerk reputation for cuffing qb's based off of one off performances, and the pressure of expectiations to perform now; The Kansas City Chiefs.

These guys hate their qb situation so bad they cheered they're own guy being knocked out,

Our recieving situation is so bad we have Evan Moore on our team as an option to have a football thrown to him in the NFL,

imagine a rice,bowe combo on the corners for options to throw to. we'd probably have to peek at the idea of a real "veteran qb" type guy down the road but i have a good feeling about RW's health this year after making it through that first gauntlet. what do you guys think, do we do a trade like this?

We are the 2014 Superbowl champions and it can never, ever be taken away.Greatest defense in NFL history.

As much as the media/fanfare like to point out our QB deficiencies I feel it is one area that has the most promise. You can't trade Flynn when he's your only other starter quality QB and the team is on course for a playoff spot.

IF I was convinced that Wilson was our QBOTF and IF Bowe (insert any top shelf receiver) pledged to sign a long term deal with us I would seriously consider it, but at this point I can't say Russ is the future and without Flynn we have Josh Portis. We are too close to take a risk like that, especially when its not going to pay immediate dividends.

kidhawk wrote:We're not trading our only serviceable backup qb while we still have a shot at the playoffs, this is simply ridiculous to even contemplate.

Are you joking?

Hmm. 9 games missing a good backup QB vs 9 games missing a #1 WR + solid chance of keeping a #1 WR for years.

It's not that tough a question. There are "solid" backup QBs on the market right now (which is why I don't think KC would do this), not Flynn's caliber (else they'd have teams), but guys who can go out there and not lose you the game.

Yes, Wilson could get hurt and you miss the playoffs. We're already teetering on the edge of missing the playoffs because our passing game is so anemic - Bowe would be a big part of the solution. So either way you're at risk of missing the playoffs, but only one option gives you a starter, and only one option gives you a starter for several seasons.

Sarlacc, on comparing .NET to Soccer: And why not? It's a bunch of people running around in circles, feigning pain, and never scoring.

kidhawk wrote:We're not trading our only serviceable backup qb while we still have a shot at the playoffs, this is simply ridiculous to even contemplate.

Are you joking?

Hmm. 9 games missing a good backup QB vs 9 games missing a #1 WR + solid chance of keeping a #1 WR for years.

It's not that tough a question. There are "solid" backup QBs on the market right now (which is why I don't think KC would do this), not Flynn's caliber (else they'd have teams), but guys who can go out there and not lose you the game.

Yes, Wilson could get hurt and you miss the playoffs. We're already teetering on the edge of missing the playoffs because our passing game is so anemic - Bowe would be a big part of the solution. So either way you're at risk of missing the playoffs, but only one option gives you a starter, and only one option gives you a starter for several seasons.

Our passing game isn't anemic because of our WR's it's anemic because our Head Coach designed it that way on PURPOSE. Trading future picks for him would be one thing, but you don't trade your only serviceable backup qb mid season unless you're looking past this season, and you don't do that when you are one game out of first and coming up on the easier portion of the schedule. One awkward hit and our season would be over. Trading for a player isn't out of the question....trading Flynn mid-season is out of the question

Of course you make this trade! In fact, you'd probably carry Flynn on your back all the way to KC to get it complete. A legit #1 starting WR for a guy who doesn't even start? What's there to consider?

Just go and find a veteran backup (there are plenty around) and hope Wilson stays healthy. A complete no brainer. Not that KC would make the deal - a QB completely unfamiliar with the playbook and you're bringing him to a roster that just lost it's #1 receiver? You might as well just roll with Cassel or Quinn and keep Bowe. I'd argue Cassel > Flynn anyway - and they've benched Cassel.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Of course you make this trade! In fact, you'd probably carry Flynn on your back all the way to KC to get it complete. A legit #1 starting WR for a guy who doesn't even start? What's there to consider?

Just go and find a veteran backup (there are plenty around) and hope Wilson stays healthy. A complete no brainer. Not that KC would make the deal - a QB completely unfamiliar with the playbook and you're bringing him to a roster that just lost it's #1 receiver? You might as well just roll with Cassel or Quinn and keep Bowe. I'd argue Cassel > Flynn anyway - and they've benched Cassel.

It's funny how bringing Flynn into a new system is a bad idea, but bringing in someone who is a play away from being our starter who is unfamiliar with our playbook and our players is such a great idea. I think someone undervalues the backup qb position in this league

Of course it's harder to bring a quarterback into a new scheme mid season than a wide out. Are you seriously arguing otherwise? Especially given part of the plan is to trade the teams clear best receiver as part of the deal.

And I'm not undervaluing anything. If you think keeping a guy who doesn't start on the bench on the off chance RW gets injured is more important than adding one of the best receivers in the league... man I cannot have that debate. That would be insane. The Seahawks would hold Matt Flynn's hand and walk him to KC to do that deal. But it's not happening, so it's a moot point.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Of course it's harder to bring a quarterback into a new scheme mid season than a wide out. Are you seriously arguing otherwise? Especially given part of the plan is to trade the teams clear best receiver as part of the deal.

And I'm not undervaluing anything. If you think keeping a guy who doesn't start on the bench on the off chance RW gets injured is more important than adding one of the best receivers in the league... man I cannot have that debate. That would be insane. The Seahawks would hold Matt Flynn's hand and walk him to KC to do that deal. But it's not happening, so it's a moot point.

Have you watched our offensive scheme? Do you really think that the passing game is diminished because of the receivers on the field....or is it because Pete is taking his time to get RW up to full speed? If it's the receivers, than bringing in a receiver will help fix the problem. If it's the latter, and it is most definitely the latter....then bringing in a receiver just puts another body on the field NOT to throw the ball to and leaves us vulnerable to an injury at the QB position. Would this be a great pickup if we traded some future picks for him or even picks and one of our current receivers? You bet. Trading Flynn is a BAD idea!!!

I would make the right deal for Flynn in a nanosecond. This would be one of those deals (not gonna happen anyway, why are we talking about this?).

In our situation right now it's a slim chance that Flynn sees the field this year anyway and just as slim a chance IMHO that he's any good when he does. You name just about any WR in this league that's under 30 and better than Tate, Baldwin or Obo, I'd make that trade for him straight up without a second thought.

kidhawk wrote:Have you watched our offensive scheme? Do you really think that the passing game is diminished because of the receivers on the field....or is it because Pete is taking his time to get RW up to full speed? If it's the receivers, than bringing in a receiver will help fix the problem. If it's the latter, and it is most definitely the latter....then bringing in a receiver just puts another body on the field NOT to throw the ball to and leaves us vulnerable to an injury at the QB position. Would this be a great pickup if we traded some future picks for him or even picks and one of our current receivers? You bet. Trading Flynn is a BAD idea!!!

Any time you can trade a back up for a league positional leader in the peak of his career, it's a no brainer. Simple as that. Common sense.

Thankfully if ever such a golden trade ever became available (it won't), this front office would be all over it.

Zebulon Dak wrote:I would make the right deal for Flynn in a nanosecond. This would be one of those deals (not gonna happen anyway, why are we talking about this?).

In our situation right now it's a slim chance that Flynn sees the field this year anyway and just as slim a chance IMHO that he's any good when he does. You name just about any WR in this league that's under 30 and better than Tate, Baldwin or Obo, I'd make that trade for him straight up without a second thought.

Kind of slipping off the main topic here, but if you meant slim chance of seeing Flynn, as in Wilson being benched for Flynn, I completely agree, I don't see this happening...but have you seen Wilson's qb slide? That is going to get him killed one day if he doesn't get better at it.

really? it seemed pretty useful earlier on when you babbled on 3 different occasions about how Seattle would be silly to pass up such a golden chance earlier.....is this still a golden chance if Bowe is only a rental for the year?

Bowe wants a big contract - it's the reason he wants out of Kansas City in the first place. Why the hell would he force a trade and then announce 'actually, I don't want to sign the deal I've been fighting for'?

And for what it's worth, the Seahawks would STILL snatch Kansas City's hands off in that situation. Flynn isn't playing here. He got beat about by Russell Wilson. As noted before when I was 'babbling on', you don't pass up the chance EVER to trade a backup taking zero snaps on a decent contract for a guy who is among the best in the league at his position. There isn't a single team in the league that wouldn't make that deal. End of.

theENGLISHseahawk wrote:Bowe wants a big contract - it's the reason he wants out of Kansas City in the first place. Why the hell would he force a trade and then announce 'actually, I don't want to sign the deal I've been fighting for'?

And for what it's worth, the Seahawks would STILL snatch Kansas City's hands off in that situation. Flynn isn't playing here. He got beat about by Russell Wilson. As noted before when I was 'babbling on', you don't pass up the chance EVER to trade a backup taking zero snaps on a decent contract for a guy who is among the best in the league at his position. There isn't a single team in the league that wouldn't make that deal. End of.

Understandably that is your opinion, but realistically speaking, how often has a team traded their only other qb on the roster mid season with a winning record? I mean if ANY team would do it, it should have happened by now. There are many times over the years where teams have serious qb needs pop up before the trade deadline.

Maybe Kansas City realized he wont re sign so THEY trade HIM instead? Not out of the realm of possibility now is it? Just because he gets traded to us does not mean he has to commit to sign with us now does it?

And if he accepts the trade but does not commit to (or show signs that will sign elsewhere after FA) would you still make the deal?

kidhawk wrote:Understandably that is your opinion, but realistically speaking, how often has a team traded their only other qb on the roster mid season with a winning record? I mean if ANY team would do it, it should have happened by now. There are many times over the years where teams have serious qb needs pop up before the trade deadline.

At what point has anyone said this is a likely trade scenario though? I think we've all accepted it's not a probable event. But that's on KC more than us. There aren't many teams that try and trade for backup QB's mid season. There aren't many teams that have a backup that anyone would want to trade for. Considering the lack of interest in Flynn the free agent, I'm not sure there's increased interest as Flynn the expensive backup. If the Seahawks had a chance to swap Flynn for a top-end positional player, they'd almost certainly do it and see what other backup QB they could find - or just promote Portis. It'd be great misfortune if Wilson then got injured, but the GM that doesn't make that trade shouldn't be in the NFL.

m0ng0 wrote:Maybe Kansas City realized he wont re sign so THEY trade HIM instead? Not out of the realm of possibility now is it? Just because he gets traded to us does not mean he has to commit to sign with us now does it?

And if he accepts the trade but does not commit to (or show signs that will sign elsewhere after FA) would you still make the deal?

This really is not a hard question....

There's this thing called the franchise tag, you know? Any team willing to trade for Bowe is willing to sign him to a new deal. Any team willing to offer Bowe a deal, he'll be interested in. The franchise tag is available for insurance but probably wouldn't be required in this situation. And the worst case scenario is half a season out of Bowe for a player who barring grave misfortune is going to be sat on the bench for the rest of the year.